Presumably he also had water, but they didn't mention it. According to one site, a kilo of potatoes would be only 800 calories and a kilo of naan about 2500 calories- so even if he had a kilo of each, he wouldn't have had enough to supply energy for intense hiking for three days.

// Old mother Hubbard's dog had to make do with naan.

// Even if he had had a locator beacon, the nanny boys would have given him a lecture.

He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

There are so many options for shelf-stable pre-packaged foods in the supermarket, there's no excuse. Pouches of tuna, apple sauce pouches, etc. Just buy those Coglan's plastic tubes and fill with peanut butter.

Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion:He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

That's how I read it, too. The food was just icing on the cake. Or potatoes on the naan. Or whatever.

Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion:He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

I agree he was unprepared, but that charge is really stretching it. He didn't put anyone at risk. They don't have to save him.

kim jong-un:Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

I agree he was unprepared, but that charge is really stretching it. He didn't put anyone at risk. They don't have to save him.

Quantum Apostrophe:There are so many options for shelf-stable pre-packaged foods in the supermarket, there's no excuse. Pouches of tuna, apple sauce pouches, etc. Just buy those Coglan's plastic tubes and fill with peanut butter.

notmtwain:Presumably he also had water, but they didn't mention it. According to one site, a kilo of potatoes would be only 800 calories and a kilo of naan about 2500 calories- so even if he had a kilo of each, he wouldn't have had enough to supply energy for intense hiking for three days.

It depends on what form the potatoes are in. My go-to back country dinners are Knorr rice mixes and Idahoan potatoes. Both only require water. One 4oz package of Idahoan potatoes contains around 450 calories (the one usually purchase has more than that but I can't remember off the top of my head). Knorr rice sides usually have almost 800 calories per package (I split these into two meals).

Of course, I don't *just* eat potatoes. I add Oscar Mayer real bacon pieces (one package = ~280 calories) to give a 100+ calorie boost. And if it is cold and/or I'm doing a lot of work, I have a tortilla or spoons of almond butter or an energy bar or something.

It sounds like they were simply busting him for *something* as he didn't detail his plans better or at least carry an emergency beacon. Back before emergency beacons were affordable, I *always* let the local ranger station know my itinerary and route (and still do usually).

Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion:He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

No, it sounds like he got injured and had to be rescued, which has nothing to do with how much food he's carrying. You can argue that he shouldn't have been hiking alone, but even if he had one or two other people with him they would have been very hard pressed to get him out of there without outside assistance.

There's also this:"Getting the basics right with trekking is so easy - all people have to do is notify the police or other responsible person of their trip intention and carry a personal locator beacon," he said. "Making use of available technology, together with some commonsense trip preparation, could mean the difference between life or death."

Ask anyone that works in mountain rescue organization what they think of those rescue beacons. Too many of the calls from those things are from hikers were tired and just didn't want to walk all the way back. They instill false confidence which only leads to more wilderness accidents, not fewer.

kim jong-un:Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

I agree he was unprepared, but that charge is really stretching it. He didn't put anyone at risk. They don't have to save him.

Good. If you think you're Bear Grylls and you can get out there and survive by eating leaves and berries and drinking your own pee, and the park ranger service has to expend a lot of manhours saving your dumb ass, you should have to pay for it.

Quantum Apostrophe:There are so many options for shelf-stable pre-packaged foods in the supermarket, there's no excuse. Pouches of tuna, apple sauce pouches, etc. Just buy those Coglan's plastic tubes and fill with peanut butter.

Every now and then, I would use those to store liquid butter (need flavor at altitude :) ) but after having one leak on me, I haven't used them. I store my almond butter in those 8oz plastic "jars" you can find in the canning section at the grocery store. They're a little bulky but they stand up good to abuse.

kim jong-un:Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

I agree he was unprepared, but that charge is really stretching it. He didn't put anyone at risk. They don't have to save him.

Actually they do. It's their job. If a firefighter was injured trying to save your house, would you say, "He didn't have to show up."

Medical and Emergency Personnel are paid to save you, even from your own stupidity.

kim jong-un:Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

I agree he was unprepared, but that charge is really stretching it. He didn't put anyone at risk. They don't have to save him.

Well, they do, actually. (OK, maybe if they're volunteers they could just decide to pass), but our society has deemed it worth it to have trained rescuers, fire fighters, etc., to deal with situations like this, and our society has chosen that they don't just get to say "Wow, he sure was a dumb ass, we're just not going to rescue him now."

UberDave:It sounds like they were simply busting him for *something* as he didn't detail his plans better or at least carry an emergency beacon. Back before emergency beacons were affordable, I *always* let the local ranger station know my itinerary and route (and still do usually).

Yeah, I can't bring myself to go on even a day trek without talking to a ranger first, unless I'm in a very high-traffic tourist area with plenty of other people visible. Rangers know about all the places the path may have washed out, what animals are in the area, and anything else I may wish I knew once I'm hours away from the trailhead.

kim jong-un:Pelvic Splanchnic Ganglion: He wasn't fined for hiking with only potatoes and bread. He was fined for "engaging in activity that risks the safety of self/others". The fact that they had to send out Search/Rescue is clearly proof of that. Based on the article, it sounds like he did everything wrong (including not bringing enough provisions).

I agree he was unprepared, but that charge is really stretching it. He didn't put anyone at risk. They don't have to save him.

Actually, that's sort of the job of these rescue folks. Perhaps it isn't bootstrappy enough for you though...

Now that we're smack in the middle of climbers-getting-lost/stranded-on-Mt.-Hood season, I'll restate my position: People going on these dangerous treks or climbs who don't want to bother with a locator beacon should have to sign some sort of form to the effect that (A) they waive their right to be rescued, or (B) they agree to pay any and all costs associated with said rescue should they require it.

hlehmann:Ask anyone that works in mountain rescue organization what they think of those rescue beacons. Too many of the calls from those things are from hikers were tired and just didn't want to walk all the way back. They instill false confidence which only leads to more wilderness accidents, not fewer.

The people I've talked to think they are a good idea. Yes, there are individuals who decide to try longer routes with the idea if they get tired they will simple "press the button". This happens all the time. But I don't think people are going "humm...I think I will try this craggy class 5 traverse with zero protection and no bail equipment and if I get in trouble, I'll just use my beacon!".

These beacons are really good for letting family members know you are ok. They are peace of mind and shouldn't be substituted for a detailed itinerary left with several people. And they do save people in legitimate rescue situations.

wingedkat:UberDave: It sounds like they were simply busting him for *something* as he didn't detail his plans better or at least carry an emergency beacon. Back before emergency beacons were affordable, I *always* let the local ranger station know my itinerary and route (and still do usually).

Yeah, I can't bring myself to go on even a day trek without talking to a ranger first, unless I'm in a very high-traffic tourist area with plenty of other people visible. Rangers know about all the places the path may have washed out, what animals are in the area, and anything else I may wish I knew once I'm hours away from the trailhead.

But that's not hiking. It's just going for a walk. Real hikes don't use trails.

siyuntz:Now that we're smack in the middle of climbers-getting-lost/stranded-on-Mt.-Hood season, I'll restate my position: People going on these dangerous treks or climbs who don't want to bother with a locator beacon should have to sign some sort of form to the effect that (A) they waive their right to be rescued, or (B) they agree to pay any and all costs associated with said rescue should they require it.

Or they can buy mountain rescue insurance or pay associated local fees that support the rescue org. But if you solo, you could carry a beacon. Your damn sleeping bag will probably cost more than the beacon and one year of service.